Preliminary roll call (was RE: Call for F2F agenda items!) - RESPONSE NEEDED!

Hello WG,

I would like to express my gratitude to Rod for hosting the meeting and proposing agenda topics, but I must admit I am a bit puzzled and concerned by the lack of responses. Only two of the WG members (Rod and Ned) have replied to my emails, and at this time I am not even sure if (or how many of) you plan to attend the WG meeting.

I expected that having it in the Bay Area during the week of W3C TPAC meetings would be an easy choice for many of you to attend, but if this is not the case, then we need to make a final decision – having F2F with only two member companies represented at the meeting can’t really be considered a WG meeting. So, with this in mind – please reply to this email indicating whether you plan to attend the WG meeting and be there in person, or if you plan to attend the meeting remotely, or if you won’t be able to make it on Nov. 9.

Whatever your status may be – communicating it to the group is really important!

Thank you,
Vlad



From: Roderick Sheeter [mailto:rsheeter@google.com]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 12:16 PM
To: Levantovsky, Vladimir
Cc: w3c-webfonts-wg (public-webfonts-wg@w3.org)
Subject: Re: Call for F2F agenda items!

Will be there.

Topic barnstorming:
> A way to not break opentype features when they span files (e.g. unicode-range shouldn't break things)
> An effort specifically aimed at CJK compression.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:23 AM Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com<mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com>> wrote:
Folks,

The F2F (scheduled on Nov. 9) is rapidly approaching, and with the WOFF2 being on its way to PR we have only few things left to do before the current group charter runs its course.

Last year, during our F2F @ ATypI we identified a number of things (see “Big discussion on new work items” in [1]) that would be of value for this WG to consider, but not much has happened since. I think it would be useful for us as a group to revisit those items to see if they are still deemed relevant and useful, and discuss other things that you might wish to bring up – don’t be bashful!

Also, in my first item to solicit for agenda+ items for the F2F [2] I proposed a topic format that I think will be very helpful to get us all up to speed and make the F2F productive – if you could please submit your proposed items in that format it would be great, but the most important part is to SUBMIT – formatting is of no concern if we have nothing to discuss.

I do realize that some/many of the issues that were brought up may not be seen as “in scope” of traditional W3C WG work, and that not every problem we identified can be fixed in this forum – we might want to dedicate some time and discuss if certain problems we see might actually be suitable to be addressed by other forums. E.g., looking at the last year CJK related discussion I wonder if making a submission that would fix ISO/IEC 14496-28 CFR standard might be a helpful endeavor – we can do it via an established liaison relationship between W3C and MPEG.

Again, we have only a couple of weeks left before the big TPAC week, and I am looking forward to seeing many of you there and at the F2F.
If you could please reply to this email with:

-          Your proposed agenda topic, and/or

-          Whether you plan to be there in person for the F2F on November 9
I’d very much appreciate it!

Thank you,
Vlad


[1] http://www.w3.org/2016/09/12-webfonts-minutes.html
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2017Sep/0011.html